Dear Editor:

The picture on your front cover (Beneath the Uniform, GLT #909) depicting a model stripping off her military uniform to reveal only a camouflaged bra underneath made me cringe. In what is supposed to be articles about Gays and Lesbians in the military, you showed extremely bad taste. If you must give us these degrading views of women in your magazine, must you also dishonor your country’s uniform as well? How can anyone respect women in uniform serving our country after your sleazy depiction of them as sex objects? On the inside, the insult is again repeated by showing the same degraded woman wearing a tank top with nothing underneath, in an article defending the right of women serving in combat roles. Just what, may I ask, do nipples have to do with combat? And just who is C.S. Muncy? Soldier or civilian? Real or ficticious? Male, female, closeted, out??? No explaining is given. Instead, what we get is this bemoaning that women are being restricted from combat missions. To Muncy, being denied the right to bomb other women and children is somehow oppressive to them; it denies “access” by “qualified” personnel. Give me a break. It doesn’t bother Muncy one bit that more and more women are being killed is this war in Iraq; being made to fly helicopters or ride in jeeps and trucks on roads filled with land mines more than in any previous war! Since male enlistments are declining due to this unpopular war, women are becoming cannon fodder, filling their places and doing the dirty work refused by men.

So there you have it, folks. To deny women combat roles is oppressive. But to have them posing in unflattering and unwholesome ways as sex objects or use them as willing scapegoats for absentee men is hereby okay.

John Primavera

Dear Editor:

GLT’s list of disqualifiers for Donna Frye’s candidacy for mayor include her being overwhelmingly popular and arguably the rightful mayor, a long-time activist, 100% on LGBT issues, and someone who would shake things up at city hall. The Times editorial portrays Frye as a popular, dedicated individual who has already demonstrated her electability by winning a 5,000 vote majority in the previous mayoral race, as a write-in candidate no less, who will bring change to an incompetently run, if not out-and-out corrupt city government. And then claims this is a bad thing. Can we say “irrational”? The Times questions Frye’s electability on the basis of comments allegedly made by a few unnamed, pro-establishment assimilationists masquerading as liberal democrats. It tries to build a case that this anonymous cabal represents a hidden groundswell of opposition to Frye. But at the meeting of the San Diego Democratic Club considering an endorsement for mayor, only four individuals (which presumably included Times publisher Portantino, who was present) voted not to endorse Frye. Four individuals is not a groundswell. It isn’t even a vocable minority. As a non-Democrat and an “outsider” who has only recently returned to San Diego, I find Donna Frye to be someone very easy to take seriously, GLT’s offensive and sexist “surfer-chick” appellation notwithstanding. Frye’s evident intelligence, integrity, dedication, and heart are inspiring and mark someone fully capable of leadership. The Time’s persistent, baseless derogation of Frye evidences sheer prejudice and bias, not a careful, considered examination of her qualifications as a candidate for mayor. Our community deals with enough bias and prejudice. We don’t need the Gay and Lesbian Times compounding it. Rev Keith W Ramsey

Dear Editor:

I have been involved with the HIV/AIDS community for the past 20 years, being one of the founders of Fraternity House, Inc. and involved in the founding of the North County Community AIDS Partnership, I found the article on the Being Alive North County Coordinated Service Center very misleading. I have known Mr. Finnell for over a decade having worked with him on fundraisers in North County, medical conferences and other agency boards that we have served on together. I also did training over the years for North County Being Alive when they provided training for volunteers who wanted to work for HIV/AIDS agencies. Mr. Finnell was heading Being Alive North County at that time as he has since 1994 and has created a very strong program where none had existed previously. He is a very caring person towards the HIV/AIDS community as well as being hard working, a very good business person and working and collaborating well with other agencies in North County. I find it outrageous that Ms. Wagner, the executive director of Being Alive, is placing the blame for the mess that has occurred here in North County on Mr. Finnell.

Since this transition, I have tried to contact the board of directors of Being Alive and had a very difficult time doing so. When I did finally talk to the president of the board, Johann Judkins, I found him to be unpleasant and unconcerned in dealing with the public or certainly with me. He did not answer questions to my satisfaction and seemed more concerned with whether I was an “ HIV/AIDS consumer” or a community figure. Who are these people and what are their backgrounds? Why has this happened here in North County? Why wasn’t Being Alive Central able to handle this transition? Mr. Finnell had made two transitions before this and there were no problems whatsoever.

It seems to me that there is something drastically wrong with this agency, its executive director and board of directors. To have something like this happen and blame it on Mr. Finnell is not right. I am positive he had no say whatsoever about the budget and how monies are spent. I hope people who are donating to this agency make sure they know where their money is going.

I strongly suggest that Being Alive be audited, both for financial management and for quality of service.

Mary Jane Boyd

Dear Editor:

My following opinion is in regards to Conversations with Nicole-Issue 910. First of all I want to point out that this is indeed a gay and lesbian publication not a religious or Conservative paper. For Nicole to complain about the cover page not being honorable to the Marines is an obnoxious over observation. Since when is being sexy a sign of disrespect? And what would be appropriate? Perhaps a picture of President Bush or Colin Powell at the war memorial in D.C.? But then that would be a mainstream paper! Every time I read or hear someone complain about how our papers are too sexy or too pretty I think “well gee I guess sex really does sell huh.” After all do you want to pick up a paper with boring or ugly covers? Ok so the gay community is a little too obsessed with looks, granted. But that does not mean we should start whining about the cover of a paper not being Conservative enough, boring enough ,or ugly enough! Get real. We have fought too hard and too long for our freedom of the press and expression too start acting straight just so that the norms can feel better about us. So Nicole, if you want a straight salute then pick up a copy of a straight paper. But if you want something gay and sexy, however inappropriate you think it is, then welcome to the world of gay and proud!

Daniel Stillwell